tpo15
Both of the reading and lecture are about the archaeology condition and its career in the twentieth century in The United Kingdom. The reading provides three reasons for the reduction archeology projects and careers and then supports them. The professor casts doubt on claims made in the article and finds all arguments dubious.
First of all, the author of reading declares that at that time, the population of Great Britanie increased and government had to construct more buildings; hence, during the mentioned process, a lot of valuable archaeological sites as well as a great number of ancient artifacts were destroyed. This point is challenged by the lecturer and she points out that in 1990 a new guide line for construction projects was created in The United Kingdom. Based on this guide line, before starting every construction project, the government and local force had to evaluate the site and then they had to preserve and document the old materials.
Secondly, the article contends that archaeological projects were not supported by the government because the rulers just funded few important sites and other ancient sites did not receive enough money for researching and even shifting the state got worse this condition; in contrast, the lecturer expresses that in the same aforementioned guide line, the construction companies had to fund these types of projects not government; therefore, unlike the past, Archaeologists could excavate a wide range of materials and there were not any limitation in this period of time.
Finally, the reading passage states that even though the archaeology field would find in universities; however, it was very formidable for young archaeologists to gain a job; consequently, a large number of archaeologists left their dream and only unpaid amateur people collaborated in some projects. This argument is rebutted by the lecturer again and she poses that surprisingly construction firms which needed to evaluate building sites before construction, had to hire a great number of archeologists, so demand for this occupation increased and even more this field pursued in more professional ways.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 557, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...d there were not any limitation in this period of time. Finally, the reading passage states...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 190, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...aeologists to gain a job; consequently, a large number of archaeologists left their dream and onl...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, in contrast, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 7.30242825607 219% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.01324503311 339% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1818.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 338.0 270.72406181 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37869822485 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99253883523 2.5805825403 116% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 145.348785872 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57100591716 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 37.0 21.2450331126 174% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 142.793384361 49.2860985944 290% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 202.0 110.228320801 183% => OK
Words per sentence: 37.5555555556 21.698381199 173% => OK
Discourse Markers: 15.2222222222 7.06452816374 215% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0589419494175 0.272083759551 22% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0251769643467 0.0996497079465 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0129756579193 0.0662205650399 20% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0364014001578 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0139651336501 0.0443174109184 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.7 13.3589403974 170% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.92 53.8541721854 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 11.0289183223 160% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.52 12.2367328918 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.54 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.8 10.498013245 160% => OK
text_standard: 23.0 11.2008830022 205% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.